linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: per-device dma_mapping

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 May 2008 07:24:33 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	muli@...ibm.com, alexisb@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: per-device dma_mapping_ops

FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2008 12:48:04 +0200
> Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> 
>>> I thought that KVM people want to do it per device (in the first
>>> case). So with my patchse, they can replace the dma_ops pointer in
>>> dev_archdata with what they want.
>> But where would they save the original pointer?
> 
> Yeah, we need an extra mechanism for that but it's same for the
> system-wide dma_ops pointer (i.e. without my patches), isn't it?
> 
> I'm still not sure how this patchset make it impossible to have stack
> dma_ops. These people need per-device dma_ops and we can do stack
> per-device dma_ops?

Anybody who does stack ops in your scheme would need to hook into new
device creation and an own per device saving pointer. Also there
are livetime issues when to wrap.

It's certainly possible, but likely complicated

-Andi


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/